PDA

View Full Version : So this garbage that Danny hasn't been passing...



Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:04 AM
Is just that...garbage. Which C-Webb was doing his damnedest to perpetuate this game.

Game 1, second on the team in assists.
Game 2, first on the team in assists.

The Danny hate is absurd right now. I read twitter and all it is, is *****ing that Danny doesn't pass. Well in games 1 and 2, he's shot 50% (tonight when he was apparently the ball hog extraordianaire some claim he was, he had 19 points on 14 shots and 4 assists, how is that not efficient team basketball?)

Seriously people, quit it. You're just making yourself look stupid. And before someone says, but "He's not making good decisions with the ball!" BULL *****

He has 2 turnovers in the first two games.

So please, stop bagging on Danny. It's absurd. How about we take a long hard look at Roy Hibbert, who got benched for Jeff Foster for a decent portion of the 4th quarter, and we stop bagging on the guy that has been clearly our best player through two games and has been efficient in both games.

Seriously stop, the hate isn't a good look.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:05 AM
P.S. He's the only guy on the team shooting 50% or higher for the series. (Other than Ford's 2/2 night tonight.)

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:07 AM
Also, what prompted this post, was the absolute crap I read from some on twitter, referencing how Granger's "Hero" mode was killing the team. Really? Going 7/14 for 19 points is trying to be a hero? Could have fooled me.

cdash
04-19-2011, 01:08 AM
He did force a few shots that were not in the flow of the offense, but big picture, I agree. Danny is forced into being something he's not. It's not his fault. Plus, Deng is a really, really good defender with good length. That is really tough for Danny.

To those people that want to trade him: What do you expect you are going to get that is better?

Eleazar
04-19-2011, 01:09 AM
You are completely missing the point. A lot of times Granger does turn into a ballhog and that account for more than half of his missed shots the past two games.

Sollozzo
04-19-2011, 01:10 AM
The problem is that people have unreasonable expectations of Granger. They expect him to take over games the way Kobe or Lebron do. They expect Reggie-like playoff heroics from him.

Hibbert does have a long way to go still, but he is playing against one of the best defensive frontcourts in the league.

BringJackBack
04-19-2011, 01:10 AM
If it weren't for Danny we'd have gotten slaughtered these past two games.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:10 AM
You are completely missing the point. A lot of times Granger does turn into a ballhog and that account for more than half of his missed shots the past two games.

Right, so what you're saying is, you'd be really happy if Granger shot 60%+ these past two games? Way to be completely reasonable.

Gold
04-19-2011, 01:11 AM
He did chuck a bit and not go with the flow of the offense but I completely agree. Danny Granger has been good with passing all year actually.

pacer4ever
04-19-2011, 01:12 AM
C-Webb did a great job on why our offense stalls we take bad shots and plays selfish at times normaly at crunch time(not just Danny)

Hoop
04-19-2011, 01:13 AM
Agreed, Danny is a shooter/scorer. Honestly, I really don't expect him to see the floor very well.

Webber did a very good job overall, but come on, when he was comparing Rose's passing with Danny I was thinking what?, Danny's not a PG or even a point forward.

Danny's played very well, he takes a few bad shots, but who doesn't? Danny's passing is improving, but he's mainly a scorer, I can live with that.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:13 AM
He chucked his way to 50% from the field. That's quite an interesting definition of chucking.

News flash: Every single player in the NBA takes bad shots. Neither of the past 2 nights have Danny's bad shots really had an impact on the game. Nor is he not sharing the ball as some of have inferred.

He's sharing it quite a bit more than our backup point guard is.

daschysta
04-19-2011, 01:14 AM
Danny can't be blamed until AJ's last free throws he was the only pacer in double figures, and he did it efficiently and led the team in assists all while being doubled all game...

What do you people want?

It's funny that people laud hansbrough like he's basketball jesus, say he's better than danny and that danny should defer to him and yet when he plays like dog crap he's absolved of all blame while danny still gets roasted despite being clearly our best player over the first two games.

Sheesh.

Sookie
04-19-2011, 01:14 AM
He passes to Price.

I don't know whether AJ knows the correct angle to be at, or whether Danny just trusts Price, but typically when Danny is in trouble, if AJ is open, he'll pass it to AJ instead of forcing a bad shot. 3 or 4 times this game he did that.

Danny has been good this series. I don't understand the hate. This is his first time playing the playoffs in a while and he's going to make some mistakes himself. But overall, he's upped his game.

Eleazar
04-19-2011, 01:14 AM
He did force a few shots that were not in the flow of the offense, but big picture, I agree. Danny is forced into being something he's not. It's not his fault. Plus, Deng is a really, really good defender with good length. That is really tough for Danny.

To those people that want to trade him: What do you expect you are going to get that is better?

Danny isn't forced to be something he isn't. If he isn't a guy who can be a ballhog and score 25+ like Rose, Lebron, Wade, etc. then he shouldn't try to. He should do more to play within the offense instead of occasionally try to take over.

ilive4sports
04-19-2011, 01:14 AM
I don't understand what else people want from Danny. He isn't Kobe. He isn't LeBron. We all know this. Don't ask him to be it. He is the best player on a team, that plays like a team. He never has been a ball hog. He never lets his ego become too big for this team. He has been pretty damn good and consistent so far in the playoffs. The only other player we can say about that so far is Collison. Danny played damn good defense tonight too. I couldn't believe that Webber was calling him a ball hog. It was quite funny when he hit AJ for that three afterwards though.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:17 AM
Danny isn't forced to be something he isn't. If he isn't a guy who can be a ballhog and score 25+ like Rose, Lebron, Wade, etc. then he shouldn't try to. He should do more to play within the offense instead of occasionally try to take over.

He did play within the offense. Please explain to me how a team's leading scorer taking 14 shots, scoring 19 points on 50% shooting with 4 assists and only 1 turnover from the small forward spot isn't playing within the offense. Please enlighten us all how Danny should have played within the offense. How could he have been more efficient? Should he have given it to Tyler more who was 2/12? Or how about Roy who is playing with his tail between his legs? Please tell us all how Danny could have been a better team player.

LetsTalkPacers
04-19-2011, 01:17 AM
Trader joe sure does like to hear himself talk.

ilive4sports
04-19-2011, 01:17 AM
Danny isn't forced to be something he isn't. If he isn't a guy who can be a ballhog and score 25+ like Rose, Lebron, Wade, etc. then he shouldn't try to. He should do more to play within the offense instead of occasionally try to take over.

Wait, taking 14 shots is being a ball hog and trying to score 25+? He doesn't dominate the ball like Rose, LeBron or Wade. Its not even close.

vapacersfan
04-19-2011, 01:18 AM
Part of the problem is people have unrealistic expectations, part of the problems is IMO Danny tries to be the hero (perhaps that is worded poorly, he just wants to take over) and part of the problem is he is a Robin who is being asked to be superman.

After today's game no one is the goat, unless you want to call the refs out. And even as much as they sucked, they sucked equally bad for both sides. The officiating was horrendous IMHO, but I will stop because I have already been told the NBA officiating is find and there is nothing to talk about there

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:18 AM
Can't believe I'm reading that the guy that lead us in scoring, field goal percentage, assists, and assist to turnover ratio tonight didn't play within the offense.

This is truly amazing. Some of you will always find someone to hate.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:18 AM
I'll stop complaining about it when Danny stops doing it.

Is he a habitual offender? Depends on your definition, but I'll say no.

But that doesn't mean in both games I haven't gotten royally pissed with some truly selfish and/or stupid plays he's made. He doesn't do a ton of them, but he certainly does make a few of them, and they're just NEEDLESS. They're not even plays where you think "Yeah, I can see how he was forced into that." They're not! He just does dumb things sometimes!

Our ROOKIE, Paul George, is less selfish and a better passer already. It's slightly pathetic.

It's a simple concept, when you're on a 2 on 1 fast break, and the 1 is guarding you, pass the ****ing ball so your teammate has a layup. If you're stuck dribbling around the floor in the halfcourt, and well-defended, maybe you DON'T force up a God-awful contested jumpshot. Just a theory, but I have a hunch on this one!

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:19 AM
Trader joe sure does like to hear himself talk.

This was quite enlightening! Thank you!

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:19 AM
I'll stop complaining about it when Danny stops doing it.

Is he a habitual offender? Depends on your definition, but I'll say no.

But that doesn't mean in both games I haven't gotten royally pissed with some truly selfish and/or stupid plays he's made. He doesn't do a ton of them, but he certainly does make a few of them, and they're just NEEDLESS.

Our ROOKIE, Paul George, is less selfish and a better passer already. It's slightly pathetic.

It's a simple concept, when you're on a 2 on 1 fast break, and the 1 is guarding you, pass the ****ing ball so your teammate has a layup. If you're stuck dribbling around the court and well-defended, maybe you DON'T force up a God-awful contested jumpshot. Just a theory, but I have a hunch on this one!

George is not a better passer than Granger.

15th parallel
04-19-2011, 01:20 AM
Agree with the OP here. The fact that he's 50% in FG, averaging more than 20pts in very few attempts, getting some assists and has not turned the ball over as much as he does during the regular season is a living testament that he is playing better basketball in the playoffs and that he's sharing the ball as much as the other guys.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:21 AM
What some of you are basically saying tonight is that you would have been happy if Danny shot 60% instead of 50%, and I'm telling you right now, that is not reasonable.

ilive4sports
04-19-2011, 01:22 AM
I'm just wondering, who was Granger supposed to pass to tonight? Hans and Hibbert shot terribly. George wasn't shooting great. He was the offense when he was out there tonight. Does he make selfish plays? Yes, every number one option does, especially when his teammates aren't doing much on offense. Let's be a little realistic here. Who else did you want taking the shots? The guy shooting 50% or the guy that shot 2 for 12?

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:24 AM
Fine to make the argument that Granger struggled with his passing during this regular season.

Fine to say that under JOB Granger had a tendency to settle and ballhog.

But to say he hasn't played within the offense these first two games? To even attempt to say he's one of the reasons we lost game 1 and 2? Utter absurdity.

Eleazar
04-19-2011, 01:24 AM
Right, so what you're saying is, you'd be really happy if Granger shot 60%+ these past two games? Way to be completely reasonable.

When did I say anything like that? I said at least half of his misses are because he tried to do too much himself. That doesn't mean I expect him to shoot 60%, it just means I wish he would stop taking so many bad shots. If that means he shoots 75% then good. I don't care how well he shoots outside of those bad shots, I just care about those bad shots.

Why do you automatically assume because I didn't defend Granger that I expect him to shoot 60% instead of 50%? My only expectation for Granger is to give 100% effort, and play smart. If he does that I don't expect him to shoot like no one is guarding him, but I guarantee people would think he played much better. There are many very legitimate reasons to criticize Granger, and just because someone criticizes him doesn't mean they have outrageous expectations.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:25 AM
He shot 50% tonight! Lead us in assists! Averaged more than 1 point per field goal attempt! Only had 1 turnover! (BTW you could say these exact same things for game 1, except he was second in assists) What more do you want?

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:26 AM
George is not a better passer than Granger.

It's not even a question, as far as I'm concerned. You'll come around on this, sooner or later.

Bball
04-19-2011, 01:26 AM
When Danny Granger quits chucking unexplainable bad shots I'll quit mentioning it. I don't care what his shooting percentage is, a bad shot is a bad shot... and he takes more than his share. It's a bad habit that I believe is a carry-over from 4 years of O'Brien ball... but whatever the reason, it needs corrected.

Eleazar
04-19-2011, 01:27 AM
What some of you are basically saying tonight is that you would have been happy if Danny shot 60% instead of 50%, and I'm telling you right now, that is not reasonable.

Who said we aren't happy with how he played? We are just saying there are aspects of his game that he needs to improve on.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:27 AM
You could say that every single player on this team took bad shots tonight.

Here's a list of guys who took worse bad shots than Granger tonight...

Hibbert.

Hansbrough.

Price.

McRoberts.

Maybe even George.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:28 AM
What some of you are basically saying tonight is that you would have been happy if Danny shot 60% instead of 50%, and I'm telling you right now, that is not reasonable.

It's only unreasonable if it's not unrealistic. If he would cut out the needlessly stupid possessions (there are usually 2-4), he probably really COULD shoot about 60% given how he's otherwise performed. He's hurting himself. And considering how good his stats look in spite of it, that's saying something.

He's having a good series. He's the reason he isn't having a GREAT series.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:29 AM
Who said we aren't happy with how he played? We are just saying there are aspects of his game that he needs to improve on.

Fine, but do you think Granger played within his offensive role tonight? Simple question, yes or no.

Constellations
04-19-2011, 01:32 AM
half My only expectation for Granger is to give 100% effort, and play smart.

If you don't think Granger isn't giving 100% effort, you need thug punched.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:32 AM
Also, Chris Webber ranted basically every time Granger got the ball in the second half that he should be passing, well he lead us in assists. So just exactly how much is he supposed to pass? Is he a scorer or not? Is he now the initiator of our offense?

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:34 AM
It's not even a question, as far as I'm concerned. You'll come around on this, sooner or later.

Really? Not even a question? A guy who has 2 assists and 5 turnovers through the first 2 games is unquestionably a better passer than a guy with 7 assists and 1 turnover?

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:34 AM
Fine, but do you think Granger played within his offensive role tonight? Simple question, yes or no.

If you insist on being black and white about it, I'm forced to say no. He chooses to hurt himself and his team on occasion, and he needs to knock it off.

ASIDE from those instances, my answer is YES.

ilive4sports
04-19-2011, 01:35 AM
On these bad shots Granger has taken, how many better options were there? I see a lot of times where he is taking a bad shot because there is no better option.

Also a trailing three or long two, do you classify that as a bad shot? I don't. I've seen him make that shot so many times that its not even funny. Thats one of his best shots actually. Tonight he missed one or two, but that is a good shot in my book.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:35 AM
Also, Chris Webber ranted basically every time Granger got the ball in the second half that he should be passing, well he lead us in assists. So just exactly how much is he supposed to pass? Is he a scorer or not? Is he now the initiator of our offense?

Webber got on him when he deserved it. Just because he led us in assists doesn't mean Webber was wrong. It's not really about each pass earning him another assist, by the way; there's more to good passing than that, but those were instances where the right play was to pass, and he didn't do it. Webber would know; he was a great, smart passer.

Cactus Jax
04-19-2011, 01:35 AM
There were maybe 3 times where I was complaining about Danny taking a shot, but most of the night he was doing really well, and getting the team to play together. I agree about Hibbert, he's played like complete crap these first 2 games yet he gets a complete pass.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:36 AM
If you insist on being black and white about it, I'm forced to say no. He chooses to hurt himself and his team on occasion, and he needs to knock it off.

ASIDE from those instances, my answer is YES.

There is no way you could say no to that question.

Danny's role is to score in an efficient manner. Shooting 50% from the field and scoring 19 points on 14 shots is scoring efficiently any way you cut it.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:37 AM
Webber got on him when he deserved it. Just because he led us in assists doesn't mean Webber was wrong. It's not really about each pass earning him another assist, by the way; there's more to good passing than that, but those were instances where the right play was to pass, and he didn't do it. Webber would know; he was a great, smart passer.

Webber basically said Granger had played selfish basketball all game long.

BigDawg44
04-19-2011, 01:37 AM
Fine, but do you think Granger played within his offensive role tonight? Simple question, yes or no.

Did Danny take bad shots tonight? Simple question.

Not saying he didn't have a good game....but as others have posted I caught myself yelling PASS a couple times.


On another note, mcroberts shot sure looked ugly tonight

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:38 AM
I'm just saying I get on twitter and Granger is getting dragged through the mud.

Yet no mention of Hansbrough. No mention of HIbbert. No mention of Price's unabashed chucking. I don't understand this part of it more than anything else.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:38 AM
Really? Not even a question? A guy who has 2 assists and 5 turnovers through the first 2 games is unquestionably a better passer than a guy with 7 assists and 1 turnover?

Yep. Passing is not bound to how many assists or turnovers you make. That can be all about decision making as opposed to actual passing talent.

The talent is clearly there, and it's clearly better than Danny's. The problem is he's raw and has a lot of learning to do. The numbers will reflect his growth moving forward. The kid tries to make the right play in times where Danny doesn't, and I've seen him make passes I've never seen Danny make. What's lacking is not talent, it's maturity/experience.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:38 AM
Did Danny take bad shots tonight? Simple question.

Not saying he didn't have a good game....but as others have posted I caught myself yelling PASS a couple times.


On another note, mcroberts shot sure looked ugly tonight

Yep Danny took bad shots tonight.

He also played within the offense.

Rose took bad shots tonight too, but he also played within the Bulls offense.

Bball
04-19-2011, 01:38 AM
On these bad shots Granger has taken, how many better options were there? I see a lot of times where he is taking a bad shot because there is no better option.

Also a trailing three or long two, do you classify that as a bad shot? I don't. I've seen him make that shot so many times that its not even funny. Thats one of his best shots actually. Tonight he missed one or two, but that is a good shot in my book.


When Granger is dribbling around and has made his mind up as soon as he receives the ball that he's going to shoot then the other options do tend to fade away....

...Or to find the other options you have to be looking for them.

Pretty soon it becomes a chicken or the egg question...

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:39 AM
On these bad shots Granger has taken, how many better options were there? I see a lot of times where he is taking a bad shot because there is no better option.

Also a trailing three or long two, do you classify that as a bad shot? I don't. I've seen him make that shot so many times that its not even funny. Thats one of his best shots actually. Tonight he missed one or two, but that is a good shot in my book.

Whenever he dribbles around or holds onto the ball too long only to chuck up a contested shot, I'd rather keep passing the ball and risk the shot clock violation than settle for that crap.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:39 AM
Yep. Passing is not bound to how many assists or turnovers you make. That can be all about decision making as opposed to actual passing talent.

The talent is clearly there, and it's clearly better than Danny's. The problem is he's raw and has a lot of learning to do. The numbers will reflect his growth moving forward. The kid tries to make the right play in times where Danny doesn't, and I've seen him make passes I've never seen Danny make. What's lacking is not talent, it's maturity/experience.

Right the talent is there to be a better passer one day.

You said he was unquestionably better than Granger right now.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:40 AM
There is no way you could say no to that question.

I didn't insist on the all-or-nothing response, you did. In that scenario, I can only answer yes if I believe it 100% of the time. I don't. It's more like 80%.


Danny's role is to score in an efficient manner. Shooting 50% from the field and scoring 19 points on 14 shots is scoring efficiently any way you cut it.

And you keep acting like I or anyone is saying he played like crap. Clearly he didn't. Those are good stats.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:41 AM
Webber basically said Granger had played selfish basketball all game long.

Not really; just enough that you noticed and took offense, which is why it FEELS that way to you.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:41 AM
I need to get to bed folks for work.

My bottom line with this thread...

Does Danny take bad shots? Yes.

Did he play within the offense tonight? Yes.

If you read Twitter tonight owuld you think Granger lost us this game by himself with the help of some bad calls by the ref? Yes.

You want to criticize Granger? Fine, but turnabout is fairplay and tonight Hansbrough and Hibbert are why we lost.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:42 AM
Not really; just enough that you noticed and took offense, which is why it FEELS that way to you.

I have to disagree here. He clearly stated that Granger had been playing selfish basketball for most of the game. Even at one point saying that Granger was the only Pacer who had been playing selfish basketball.

Time for some Zzzzz's.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:42 AM
Right the talent is there to be a better passer one day.

You said he was unquestionably better than Granger right now.

He is. I'm talking about the talent. Not about the results or the polish. Danny will get better results, but he's not the better passer.

ilive4sports
04-19-2011, 01:43 AM
Did Danny take a shot tonight that I thought he couldn't make? Nope. Every shot he took I thought he could make. Look at the options that were on the floor with Danny. How much better were they than Danny taking a contested jumper that he makes? Not much better if better at all.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:43 AM
He is. I'm talking about the talent. Not about the results or the polish. Danny will get better results, but he's not the better passer.

I disagree with your logic here completely.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:44 AM
I need to get to bed folks for work.

My bottom line with this thread...

Does Danny take bad shots? Yes.

Did he play within the offense tonight? Yes.

In general, I agree with this.


If you read Twitter tonight owuld you think Granger lost us this game by himself with the help of some bad calls by the ref? Yes.

You need to follow less people on Twitter if that's the consensus you're reading, and/or you let it bother you that much. It's not worth it.

daschysta
04-19-2011, 01:44 AM
The problem hicks is that no number one option is going to make the right play 100 percent of the time, sure he can get ribbed on a bit for a few bad shots, but those few possesions were not nearly the reason we lost tonight. Much more salient to this loss was the complete lack of help he got offensively, tyler sucked there, george struggled, roy was invisible, only darren looked solid there before he went out.

people harp on danny's few questionable shots and ignore the much bigger problems that have contributed to the losses when they happen. It's not constructive to hyper focus on a few quibbling issues in an otherwise really good first two games.

Hansbrough and hibbert should be getting alot more hate than granger for tonight, and they aren't and it always, always happens.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:46 AM
I was never arguing that Danny is why we lost, daschysta. I'm only complaining when Danny just makes a boneheaded decision. And it's usually more than one. If they weren't so easily avoidable most of the time, I wouldn't complain. If I thought he was talented enough to get something out of it more often than he actually does, I might not complain, either. He's making the kind of mistakes that I might tolerate from a superstar offensive talent. But he's not.

Eleazar
04-19-2011, 01:57 AM
First of when a team losses unless it is clearly for reasons beyond the best players control the best player on the team is usually going to get the blame or have the most amount of criticism. Anyone who says Granger doesn't deserve it in this game is right, he doesn't deserve the most amount of criticism in this game. Exactly why you didn't see any criticism of him on this board until after you posted this thread.

Did Danny play within the offense? He did the vast majority of the time, and that also tended to be when this team was at its best. There was a small amount of time where he didn't though, and those are what he is receiving criticism for.

Yes, he is going to make bad judgements sometimes, but Danny has been so bad at doing it for so long he should realize that it is better for him and the team to not to hog the ball. If it was just a once in the while thing no one would complain about it, but it happens often enough that people take notice.


Basically what it comes down to is that we are saying one thing, and you are saying we are saying something else that we are not saying. It happens far too often on this board.

mattie
04-19-2011, 05:23 AM
I'll stop complaining about it when Danny stops doing it.

Is he a habitual offender? Depends on your definition, but I'll say no.

But that doesn't mean in both games I haven't gotten royally pissed with some truly selfish and/or stupid plays he's made. He doesn't do a ton of them, but he certainly does make a few of them, and they're just NEEDLESS. They're not even plays where you think "Yeah, I can see how he was forced into that." They're not! He just does dumb things sometimes!

Our ROOKIE, Paul George, is less selfish and a better passer already. It's slightly pathetic.

It's a simple concept, when you're on a 2 on 1 fast break, and the 1 is guarding you, pass the ****ing ball so your teammate has a layup. If you're stuck dribbling around the floor in the halfcourt, and well-defended, maybe you DON'T force up a God-awful contested jumpshot. Just a theory, but I have a hunch on this one!

PG also turned the ball over and took some absolute dumb shots. Remember when PG ran the fast break and forgot to pass to his wide open trailer Danny Granger?

It's not that Danny does dumb things, it's that in your own mind everything that Danny does that doesn't result in an immediate positive result for the Pacers must be a failure on his part.

I'm sure when he drove to the basket late in the game and took that 8 foot jumpshot you thought it was selfish. I thought it was Danny trying to score for his team. Based on how well Danny scored this game? I think the statistics back up my reasoning.

It's amazing but almost every time Danny takes a long jump shot the DG haters immediately criticize the decision. It's too early in the shot clock, or the shot was contested so it must be a bad shot. No it's not. Shooters need to take as many open looks as they can whether there is 3 or 20 on the shot clock.

Danny does it. Ray does it. Reggie did it. All great shooters do it. This theory that you need to wait later in the shot clock does not work for shooters. It works for almost every other type of scorer, that have the ability to work for a better look. It doesn't work for shooters. End of story.

Watch the game and re-evaluate, because you're throwing Danny on the fire if for the only reason that you have a badly skewed perception as to how he must score the ball.

yoadknux
04-19-2011, 06:20 AM
I don't think he was playing selfish. Firstly he wasn't "over shooting" or anything like that since he had only 14 attempts. he made 50% of them, which means his general shot selection was alright. It wasn't perfect, he had 2-3 forced shots, but I think he played really well. And by the way, people were complaining all year long about Danny's defense, and I think last night, his defense has been equal to his offense. George was a lot more active on defense yes, but Danny's done a great job on Deng.

D-BONE
04-19-2011, 06:36 AM
We have nobody that can really manufacture offense off the dribble-drive a la the traditional iso approach. What happens when we get into that kind of game is we end up with guys pounding the rock too long trying to get an open shot.

It's not just DG though. PG lost a key turnover on a late possession trying to get by a seemingly good matchup in Korver. Our guys must make quick dribble moves.

If you make one or two attempts to get somewhere and you don't yet have a shot, it's time to move the ball. Not just keep pounding with your head down for another ten seconds only to end up turning it over or taking a poor shot.

That said, I really appreciate what Granger has done so far. He's played very well. The real issue, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, is that DG is a very good player, but he's fairly one dimensional in terms of his outstanding skill - shooting. Ideally, he's not your top option to be the late-clock, late-game iso guy.

For a quick shot, sure. But he's got to get open off a screen or be the recipient of pass off of penetration.

SkipperZ
04-19-2011, 06:51 AM
heres the thing. every single star offensive star player in the league takes shots that could be considered selfish and outside the flow of the offense. every single one. most of them more than danny (granted many of them are better than danny as well). it comes with confidence and it comes with feeling the responsibility of being the offensive leader of the team. all great scorers try to do too much at times because theyre confident and they want to shoulder that responsibility.

say what you want abotu danny beign our star offensive player but he is right now with his length and range and confidence the best scorer on this team and probably will continue to be that until PG develops further. with all the hate about danny putting up 3 or so "bad" shots in a game, i really wonder what you guys would say if some of these other guys were on this team.

im saying this as not the biggest danny fan in the world, trust me. I would trade him in a heartbeat for less than most of you im sure. but if i had to choose between danny being confident and taking a few bad shots a game versus a timid danny, give me confident danny 365 days a year.

Anthem
04-19-2011, 09:30 AM
I thought Danny made a concerted effort in the fourth to play team ball... on several occasions giving up the ball perfectly to another player.

Did nobody else see that?

Justin Tyme
04-19-2011, 09:38 AM
The real issue, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, is that DG is a very good player, but he's fairly one dimensional in terms of his outstanding skill - shooting. Ideally, he's not your top option to be the late-clock, late-game iso guy.


Thus the frustration posters have with Granger. He's not a player who can take over and score. He trys to be, but he just doesn't have what it takes to get it done. Some players can and some can't. Unfortunately, the latter category describes Granger. Could he share the ball better, yes, but that isn't what lost this game. I could see from the get go when Hibbert and Hans didn't come out playing like the 1st game a win wasn't looking real good.

Last night C-Webb commented down the stretch that the Pacers' leader needed to take over. My comment was just who do you think that is? This team hasn't had a leader in YEARS! Bird tried anointing JO as the leader and the only leading JO did was with his mouth. This team NEEDS a leader! When this team gets a true leader, is when this team can be really good.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 11:13 AM
Personally, I think Collison can be this team's leader. He has taken it right at Rose the entire series when he has been on the court.

BPump33
04-19-2011, 11:14 AM
Personally, I think Collison can be this team's leader. He has taken it right at Rose the entire series when he has been on the court.

Didn't Vogel call Collison the leader in his post-game presser last night? I thought he said, "You always miss your leader...."

Hicks
04-19-2011, 12:24 PM
It's not that Danny does dumb things, it's that in your own mind everything that Danny does that doesn't result in an immediate positive result for the Pacers must be a failure on his part.

You can say it, but you can't make it the truth.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 12:26 PM
By the way, even as I've used the word selfish, I should clarify that. I don't mean selfish in a way that suggests Danny is a bad player or a guy with a bad attitude. I think he's just making a misguided effort to help the team win. I believe he thinks he's doing the right thing for the right reason; I still think highly of Danny as a person and as someone who wants his team to win ball games.

I don't mean Ricky Davis selfish.

Now that I say that, maybe selfish isn't even the right word because that tends to mean an intentionally negative behavior.

Sookie
04-19-2011, 12:28 PM
By the way, even as I've used the word selfish, I should clarify that. I don't mean selfish in a way that suggests Danny is a bad player or a guy with a bad attitude. I think he's just making a misguided effort to help the team win. I believe he thinks he's doing the right thing for the right reason; I still think highly of Danny as a person and as someone who wants his team to win ball games.

I don't mean Ricky Davis selfish.

Now that I say that, maybe selfish isn't even the right word because that tends to mean an intentionally negative behavior.

A lot of players who don't know how to be leaders try to do everything themselves, not realizing that you need to trust your teammates.

Kobe had to learn that lesson. Heck, Kemba Walker learned that lesson this season..(maya moore did not..)

Danny Granger hasn't gotten that yet, although he was actually better.

Kid Minneapolis
04-19-2011, 12:34 PM
Derrick Rose went 11-25 with 6 turnovers, and a horrible 3-pt foul on Price with 23 secs in the game --- what a selfish CHUCKER.

I gotta disagree with all the Granger nay-sayers on this one, you're just not being reasonable. It's the playoffs, defenses get better, you're not going to play perfect. Even the "MVP" has not play perfect ball by any means, he's definitely forced shots and hurt his team on occasion. How do you expect Granger to play perfect against the best D in the league?

vapacersfan
04-19-2011, 12:35 PM
I actually REALLY like the point Sookie just made.

I think Danny is trying too hard, and as such is forcing some plays he probably should not. I think his games improves a lot with A. more trust in his teammates and B. more importantly, that missing palyer gets added to the team

P.S. Love that the "haters" arguement is still used in 2011. Lord forbid someone be critical of a players weakness (To be fair, I have his jersey and a poster signed by him, so clearly I must be the opposite of the "hater" group.....the "lovers"?/)

Since86
04-19-2011, 12:39 PM
The argument needs some context to it, I think.

You gotta remember that Danny is a second tier player trying to make top tier plays. That's the territory, and quite frankly, it needs to happen. If the Pacers had a Rose/Durant/Kobe/LeBron/Wade/etc type player, and Danny continued to play the way he is, then I would argee with you.

But the Pacers don't have that luxury, so they need to find a way to compensate. Sometimes you can do it by committee, and spread the ball around. Other times, when players are struggling, you gotta have someone with the testicular fortitude to try and make a play on their own.

I thought Danny's first half of game 1 was absymal, but I thought he's played much, much better since.

I would much rather Danny force a shot, when his supporting cast is struggling, than watch them work the ball around and get a 3pt shot as the clock is winding down from AJ like we saw twice last night late in the 4th. Sure he hit one, and got fouled on the other, but you can't depend on those type of plays to carry you late in game. Those aren't winning plays, especially in the playoffs.

Danny is the team's best player. He's going to get the ball and asked to make something happen in crunch time. He's a second tier player, and he will struggle to make those plays. If he didn't struggle with them, he would be a top tier player and we wouldn't need to have the discussion on who we could get as a closer.



I think the biggest thing I'm disappointed with is this argument after the two performances the Pacers have given us. I've learned more about heart from this squad in the past 4 days than I have all season.

Watching AJ Price hustle down that missed 3 point shot to the opposite corner then fight to get the ball back in play, only to dive under the goal and force the ball out on Chicago brought a tear to my eye.

I think being so close, but falling short, makes people raise their standards higher, and as much as I would love the Pacers to really make the series tough and force 7 games, that's not gonna happen. They need to get this 3rd game, or there's gonna be an emotional let down and they're gonna get swept.

But I'm so proud of their effort, I really thought that the Pacers game would end up closer to the Miami/Philly outcome.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 12:42 PM
I still feel like that Miami/Philly outcome is just lurking right around the corner.

It's not that I don't have faith in this team, but to maintain this sort of effort while also being this young? It's going to be tough.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:06 PM
By the way, even as I've used the word selfish, I should clarify that. I don't mean selfish in a way that suggests Danny is a bad player or a guy with a bad attitude. I think he's just making a misguided effort to help the team win. I believe he thinks he's doing the right thing for the right reason; I still think highly of Danny as a person and as someone who wants his team to win ball games.

I don't mean Ricky Davis selfish.

Now that I say that, maybe selfish isn't even the right word because that tends to mean an intentionally negative behavior.

Thinking about this more, and re-reading this thread, I feel less and less comfortable using the word selfish.

I'll just stick to poor decision making, or when I'm angry/upset I may slide back over to "stupid".

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:09 PM
I would much rather Danny force a shot, when his supporting cast is struggling, than watch them work the ball around and get a 3pt shot as the clock is winding down from AJ like we saw twice last night late in the 4th. Sure he hit one, and got fouled on the other, but you can't depend on those type of plays to carry you late in game. Those aren't winning plays, especially in the playoffs.

I disagree. I would much rather he keep the ball moving and let someone like AJ or whomever take the shot, assuming said shot is something that player can normally take and make. I don't believe in Danny being forced into playing like something he simply is not.

BillS
04-19-2011, 01:09 PM
The trouble I have with Danny is that when he makes a bad decision he is often in a position where he should know better. Leading with plenty of time on the clock, for example, is not the time to force up an early jumper - especially when you've been successful getting into the paint.

To me, it isn't that Danny <i>by himself</i> is or is not being statistically successful - it is whether Danny is willing to facilitate the rest of the team to be <i><b>more</b></i> successful.

I'll use an old example - and please be aware I am not comparing the PLAYERS, just the situation. When Travis Best used to get the ball, the entire offense stopped, TB would dribble away, and would finally either launch a shot or make a last-second pass to someone else. The question, of course, is "which came first?" - did TB have to dribble and shoot because no one moved without the ball and therefore he was forced into it, or did no one move without the ball because they knew he wouldn't do anything anyway?

My thought was that it was because of the latter. In many ways, I feel that way about Danny. The team knows he's going to try to do things on his own, so they don't get into position to be other options. Add that to Danny's recent ball handling woes (and, frankly, THAT is the thing that really disappoints me about him this year, my God, the man can't seem to dribble any more unless he's looking at the ball), and you get someone who is a black hole in clutch situations, NOT out of pure of selfishness but out of feeling like he HAS to be the man and not having any other options.

I will definitely agree that getting into this rut was one of the consequences of the previous regime. The offense as designed was not conducive to being a facilitator, especially with its emphasis on taking the first good shot rather than working for the best possible shot. However, this doesn't constitute ruining a player, it can be fixed with players who learn to work together outside of actual and <i>critical</i> game situations.

What I would hope to see is a training camp where he can get his offense integrated with the rest of the lineup once again, with a system that does not require him to be the man or make him think he has to be the man. That'll be the way to work it out of him.

Anthem
04-19-2011, 01:11 PM
Thinking about this more, and re-reading this thread, I feel less and less comfortable using the word selfish.

I'll just stick to poor decision making, or when I'm angry/upset I may slide back over to "stupid".
That's fair. I don't think anybody, including Trader Joe and I, are saying that he's never in his life made a bad decision with the ball. His decision-making isn't as good today as it was two years ago. It got better when Vogel took over, and I think it would be even better with more time under a good coach.

That said, I really thought Danny was making an effort to get others involved in the 4th quarter last night. Did nobody else see it that way?

Anthem
04-19-2011, 01:12 PM
I still feel like that Miami/Philly outcome is just lurking right around the corner.

It's not that I don't have faith in this team, but to maintain this sort of effort while also being this young? It's going to be tough.
Agreed... but wouldn't you expect that to happen at the United Center? I mean, if there was going to be a major letdown, I'd have expected it last night.

Sookie
04-19-2011, 01:16 PM
Thinking about this more, and re-reading this thread, I feel less and less comfortable using the word selfish.

I'll just stick to poor decision making, or when I'm angry/upset I may slide back over to "stupid".

I think "trying to do too much" is probably the nicest way to put it.

Since86
04-19-2011, 01:21 PM
I disagree. I would much rather he keep the ball moving and let someone like AJ or whomever take the shot, assuming said shot is something that player can normally take and make. I don't believe in Danny being forced into playing like something he simply is not.

When Chicago locks down, they're not going to give you an open shot. It's going to be contested.

I'd rather have Danny take a contested shot than anyone else, outside of Tyler or DC. But Tyler was struggling bad and DC....... ****.

This is why the Pacers are an 8th seed though. While I don't "like" it, there's just not any other options available.

Hicks
04-19-2011, 01:24 PM
Maybe, but I still think you're more likely to get a better shot off of a pass late than off of the dribble. With this roster.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:47 PM
Agreed... but wouldn't you expect that to happen at the United Center? I mean, if there was going to be a major letdown, I'd have expected it last night.

I expected it in game 1, I expected it in game 2, I sort of expect it in game 3 (we still don't know how big our home court advantage will actually be). Maybe I'm just conditioned that way after years of being the punching bag.

Don't get me wrong, we could get swept and I'd still be incredibly proud of the effort put forth in games 1 and 2, but this team deserves to push this to at least 5 and hopefully to 6, but for that to happen we need to come out roaring in game 3. And if this young team is able to do that, I will be incredibly impressed and proud. Even more than I already am.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:48 PM
That's fair. I don't think anybody, including Trader Joe and I, are saying that he's never in his life made a bad decision with the ball. His decision-making isn't as good today as it was two years ago. It got better when Vogel took over, and I think it would be even better with more time under a good coach.

That said, I really thought Danny was making an effort to get others involved in the 4th quarter last night. Did nobody else see it that way?

Right. I just take offense to the idea that Danny has been selfish at all this series. Has he made some bad decisions? Yes. Has his good play far outweighed those poor decisions? Also yes IMO.

Rogco
04-19-2011, 01:58 PM
I guess I'd be labelled as a Danny "Hater" but I think he's played fairly well so far this series. His shot has been awful at the start of games, but when he finds his stroke he's been shooting brilliantly (except the end of game 1), and I think his passing in the playoffs has been much better (ie, passing out of double teams instead of forcing up the shot or turnover)

He has left Deng wide open for threes at the end of both games that killed us and he still has a tendency to drift off on defense.

There's a lot to like about Danny's game, but he does sometimes get shot happy and I think his effort on the defensive end is still some of the worst from the Pacers.

Trader Joe, I think Pacers fans are disappointed that Danny stopped progressing two years ago at the age of 25, and a fair argument could be made it's gotten worse the last two years. I remember him diving on the floor and knocking his teeth out against the Celtics a couple years ago, the hustle he used to display on the defensive end, his energy running up and down the court and his willingness to go after loose balls. These are the things main things (to me) that have regressed and I think it's why some Pacers fans wouldn't mind seeing him go if the offer was right.

Trader Joe
04-19-2011, 01:59 PM
Didn't Vogel call Collison the leader in his post-game presser last night? I thought he said, "You always miss your leader...."

Yep, he said, "You always miss you leader. I thought (Ford and Price) filled in admirably."

http://www.indystar.com/article/20110419/SPORTS04/104190336/1062/SPORTS04/Pacers-fall-into-2-game-hole-vs-Bulls-worry-about-Collison

Pretty high praise IMO.

Anthem
04-19-2011, 07:03 PM
You know the new wrinkle I really like? Passing out of the post. I'm not sure I've ever see him do that before this season.

Jon Theodore
04-19-2011, 07:21 PM
There were a handful of possessions, where he took very bad shots that were not in the flow of the offense. Chris Webber wasn't making **** up, it was obvious. I don't care if his shooting percentage for the series is 90%. If the 10% he missed were contested jumpers, that were not in the flow of the offense...then it is EASY to say he should have passed the ball.

Also, i am not in a competition for the "most reasonable poster" award. We are all FANS here...sometimes part of being a fan is being unreasonable (having unreasonable expectations.)

If every poster had to evaluate how "reasonable" they were being, prior to posting...well this would get boring in a hurry (maybe i'm in the minority on that one, I don't know).

I call for a "Reasonable Only" sub forum, for everyone who is so disgusted by anything unreasonable.

Imagine if Granger had NOT taken those bad, contested shots out of the flow of the offense. Chris Webber would have been singing his praises and likely be talking about his 70% shooting percentage.

Sorry, but I'm not giving Danny a pass on taking bad shots (because he is too intelligent, I know he is better than that)...regardless of how well he is playing. Bad shots are bad shots are bad shots.

I was annoyed with Price last night and wanted Ford to play instead of him for the same reason...bad shots.

JEM
04-19-2011, 07:35 PM
DG has been ok passing the ball so far.. But there were times he would dribble the ball around looking like he had no intention to pass even when a guy was wide open.. Mostly late in the games.

Bball
04-19-2011, 08:08 PM
I disagree with the notion his bad shots occur when the defense has locked everyone else down. There just seems to be possessions, and I can't say they are necessarily late in the game either, where Granger seems to have made up his mind it is his turn to take a shot.

Maybe they will be shots late in the shot clock... but that is because he wasted clock with the ball going solo rather than passing the ball and trying to get the defense off balance with ball movement and player motion.

I don't think this is something that is not correctable. I think it's a product of 4 years of bad coaching and playing in a crap system.

I disagree, at least in part, with the idea that since we don't have a "Lebron" then Granger sometimes needs to play that role. I don't think this is about that actually... It's not about placing blame on Granger for the losses either. I think it's simply about how Granger can be a better player and be the best player he can be. And that would only help the team overall.

idioteque
04-19-2011, 08:32 PM
I still feel like that Miami/Philly outcome is just lurking right around the corner.

It's not that I don't have faith in this team, but to maintain this sort of effort while also being this young? It's going to be tough.

I think it's inevitable that we'll get blown out at some point in this series. Let's just hope that if it happens, it happens in Game 5 when the series is tied.

docpaul
04-19-2011, 08:59 PM
Hansbrough and hibbert should be getting alot more hate than granger for tonight, and they aren't and it always, always happens.

Granger is the team "leader" and captain. Taking the hate/blame comes with the territory. People expect more out of a 5th year all star than a 2nd or 3rd year player.

Fair? Probably not, but it's the reality.

Sookie
04-19-2011, 09:20 PM
Granger is the team "leader" and captain. Taking the hate/blame comes with the territory. People expect more out of a 5th year all star than a 2nd or 3rd year player.

Fair? Probably not, but it's the reality.

Then what's the excuse for Price and Collison always getting the hate.

They're both second year point guards, and both are younger than Hansbrough and even Hibbert. And since about March they've been the team whipping boys, well, them along with Granger.

BlueNGold
04-19-2011, 10:29 PM
There are two things that stand out IMO with Granger...our best player at the moment.

First, he is drawing a lot of attention including double teams...and that's not stopping him from putting up shots...unless the pressure is ridiculous which it has been at times. While he is taking and making a fair number of them, most have been difficult shots. I think many people believe he is attempting more difficult shots while there is an option to pass to another player for a layup or an open look. By taking those shots under pressure and hitting 50% of them, he may have been able to pass to a wide open team mate and as a team hit a greater percentage. I don't know if that's true but it's hard to believe Granger has a better shot at hitting a basket while Deng is draped over him than another player with a good 10 feet distance from his defender. With that said, we have been competitive and it's difficult to say whether we would be more successful with him passing out of that extreme pressure more than he is doing.

Second, while Danny is a very good player and there is a lot to like about him and his game, he is attempting to play the alpha dog role on this team. With that role comes great responsibility and a very high standard to live up to. We've seen people succeed in that role (e.g. Reggie Miller) and we've seen people not as successful (e.g. Jermaine O'Neal). I think Danny, considering talent, durability, the whole package, is a small notch below JO at the moment and several below Reggie Miller. The main point here is that he's not good enough to be the alpha dog on a contender. I'm not saying I don't like him as a Pacer because he's great. But I do think someone else needs to be handed the keys before this team can contend...and I think his last name may also start with G. Perhaps not this year, but that time is closer than you all think. Paul's defense is already better than Danny's as much as Danny's offense is better than Paul's. Paul probably knocked 20 points off what DRose would have scored last night...along with a ridiculous ability to pressure the passing lanes and deflect.

So, we all need to respect and enjoy what Danny brings. I know I do. But at the same time the truth needs to be told. We need a better player to contend. That's not a knock on Danny any more than it's a knock on Hibbert and Tyler. It's just a fact.

Eleazar
04-19-2011, 10:40 PM
Then what's the excuse for Price and Collison always getting the hate.

They're both second year point guards, and both are younger than Hansbrough and even Hibbert. And since about March they've been the team whipping boys, well, them along with Granger.

Collison because of the hype he got when we traded for him.

Price because people like you and me thought if given a chance he could be as good or better than Collison.

BlueNGold
04-19-2011, 10:47 PM
I will say it right now. I didn't think Darren would be this good. For one, I know he wasn't playing very well under Jim. Secondly, I didn't think he'd ever learn how to pass the ball because he wasn't showing any court vision. I think he's improved that a bit, honestly. This has made him far more effective on offense and why he now looks much better than AJ. Fact is, this is the playoffs. If we expected AJ to play well against a #1 seed, we were all drinking spiked kool-aid. Take Darren's transition under Vogel as a very pleasant surprise...or thump your chest because you called it right. As for me, I am pleasantly surprised by what I see as a pretty quick improvement under the new system.

As for the criticisms, I think they were warranted based on what we saw on the court. I am not convinced that those who backed DC were as right as they were fan-boys. JMHO.

Trophy
04-19-2011, 11:13 PM
There are a few times where I feel like Danny is looking to get points for himself rather than pass it off to an open guy.

Some of his shots are nice and he'll make ones you don't think have a chance.

For the most part, he's been moving it around pretty well.

Sookie
04-19-2011, 11:37 PM
I will say it right now. I didn't think Darren would be this good. For one, I know he wasn't playing very well under Jim. Secondly, I didn't think he'd ever learn how to pass the ball because he wasn't showing any court vision. I think he's improved that a bit, honestly. This has made him far more effective on offense and why he now looks much better than AJ. Fact is, this is the playoffs. If we expected AJ to play well against a #1 seed, we were all drinking spiked kool-aid. Take Darren's transition under Vogel as a very pleasant surprise...or thump your chest because you called it right. As for me, I am pleasantly surprised by what I see as a pretty quick improvement under the new system.

As for the criticisms, I think they were warranted based on what we saw on the court. I am not convinced that those who backed DC were as right as they were fan-boys. JMHO.

Darren isn't doing anything different now than when he was being criticized..other than making shots. So now, everyone's back on the DC train.

Price obviously stunk in the middle of last night's game. He was very very good during clutch time though. So, you can't expect a young guy to play well against the #1 seed, but at the end of last nights game, and during the first game, AJ certainly did play well. Yes, he freaked out. But that was probably the most amount of pressure he's been in since he's entered the league, and he needed a little while to calm down. The fact that he came back into the game and redeemed himself says more about him than those minutes in the middle of the game.

I notice however, that there are no "Hansbrough/Hibbert/ are terrible" complaints. Despite having some pretty bad stretches themselves..and getting badly out rebounded the entire series.

I'm not saying we should criticize them. I think they are young, they are pretty good, and they are learning. And there are reasons for why they don't play well (sometimes it's just simply that they are young) at times. I'm just saying..and I've been saying for two months now..that this applies to DC and AJ too.

And I really hope, if DC plays the next game..and doesn't play well..people will not be too harsh because he'll probably be playing hurt.

Maybe I've just got too much of a mother hen in me.."Don't pick on the children" :P

Constellations
04-20-2011, 01:54 AM
Gotta agree with Sookie. Instead of, for a lack of a better word, targeting players to criticize for the game. Everyone has blamed Danny 80% ( BS ), A.J. 20%.

It's ridiculous the so many didn't even address Tyler's 2-12 and Roy's bad game. Which it seems blaming Danny is pretty popular because he's the most outspoken player on the team. But A.J. did play good, seriously. That 3 point play grabbing that foul on D-Rose was pro. Not only did he get the foul, he knocked down all 3 in the midst of 22,480 chanting "Pacers Suck". Way to Smite the a$$holes A.J.

Trader Joe
04-23-2011, 06:00 PM
Gotta bump this, as I think Granger has continued to play outstanding basketball this series, and I thought we did a terrible job of getting him the ball late today.

Anthem
04-23-2011, 07:32 PM
Gotta bump this, as I think Granger has continued to play outstanding basketball this series, and I thought we did a terrible job of getting him the ball late today.
No doubt. People were saying in the regular season that Danny was the kind of guy who can't step his game up in the playoffs, which I thought was odd considering the lack of data. But Danny's been great this series, which bodes well for the future.

Trader Joe
04-23-2011, 07:58 PM
The only guy who has out played Granger on either team has been Rose and even then he's shooting like 35% from the field compared to Danny's 49% which is downright scorching considering the level of defense being played in this series.

Here's another crazy stat, Danny has 13 assists and only 4 turnovers over the course of the series which again consider the level of defense that has been played is pretty remarkable.

cdash
04-23-2011, 08:02 PM
Granger has played really, really well this series. I'm very happy with what he's been doing.

BringJackBack
04-23-2011, 08:44 PM
21.3 ppg, 49% shooting, 3 assists per game, and 4 boards a game with Luol Deng guarding him, someone who was annointed a "Great defender" by someone on this board that I will not name..

Meanwhile Danny playing very good defense on Luol Deng as well.

Anthem
04-25-2011, 12:59 PM
Meanwhile Danny playing very good defense on Luol Deng as well.
And Deng makes more money than Danny... as does Carlos Boozer.

Infinite MAN_force
04-25-2011, 01:05 PM
And yet... Danny is the problem? :whoknows:

PacerPride33
04-25-2011, 01:07 PM
during the season i definetely started to lose faith in danny being our star player and entertained the idea of trading him. but after this series, danny is a must-keep for this team. add talent around danny and danny will only improve. awesome series for him and i think he is stepping up as a leader also, which is great to see

naptownmenace
04-25-2011, 01:19 PM
21.3 ppg, 49% shooting, 3 assists per game, and 4 boards a game with Luol Deng guarding him, someone who was annointed a "Great defender" by someone on this board that I will not name..

Meanwhile Danny playing very good defense on Luol Deng as well.

Danny's defense and passing has been great this series.

Unlike most on here I thought the Pacers should have got him the ball more in the last 2 minutes of game 3. If they had, they probably would've pulled out the victory.

Danny is clearly the best scorer on the team and the Pacers should be working to get him open and get him more easy shots at the end of games, IMO. Why don't they run him off screens like we do for Mike Dunleavy?